Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ashram Chowk

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Keep as per consensus, with no calls for deletion beyond the nominator. Non-admin closure. Warrah (talk) 00:26, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ashram Chowk

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Prodded with the reason "Unnotable ring road junction, no evidence of notability", prod removed removed without reason so bringing here Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 09:11, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Well, there's certainly a large amount of things that happen at this intersection. Silver seren^C 04:15, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:50, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:50, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Meets the general notability guideline. Even if the (now evolving) notability criteria for streets, roads and highways are considered, it meets the criteria for being a permanent place where significant news coverage is originating from. prashanthns (talk) 08:32, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - with its chronic traffic jams it gets non trivial coverage every week in Delhi media.--Sodabottle (talk) 14:32, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This article has been nominated for rescue. Silver seren^C 17:54, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I have tagged this article for rescue. Silver seren^C 17:54, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Meets the WP:GNG test of significant coverage in reliable sources. "Significant" and "reliable" are important adjectives, but they are elastic, and there is good reason to stretch them in cases of geographical landmarks where existence can easily be verified and controversial content is unlikely. --Mkativerata (talk) 08:34, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep 87 results for Google news search when I click the thing at the top of this AFD. [1] Lot of traffic problems on that wicked distant road. People must be informed. Dream Focus 08:14, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.